ueaj

Researcher -

prev: @pangram @blocks

[ueaj @_ueaj]

guy who spends all day working with symbols: "wow! the fundamental nature of intelligence is just like symbols!"

[ueaj @_ueaj]

@4xCaliban @SYNESTHEIZURE true love

[ueaj @_ueaj]

@AndyMasley how much did u put in

[ueaj @_ueaj]

@VirialExpansion no I think that's important and we should actually fight extremely hard for it, this is just a separate disagreement

[ueaj @_ueaj]

@4xCaliban it's ok, the speed of light is finite, we just need to dream bigger

[ueaj @_ueaj]

1. The first screenshot does not say labor is good. The fact that the rich get to enjoy idleness is a privilege, a good thing, one the people don't have. They are not saying that work is wrong, they're saying it's necessary and it's unfair the bourgeoise don't have to do it

2. The second states that in socialism work would not be compelled and thus more enjoyable (akin to hobbies), which is also true of post-scarcity. It states that work, for work's sake is enjoyable, which I agree with and is not threatened by automated communism

3. 3rd says the same thing, work would not disappear, compelled work would

[Nathan Calvin @_NathanCalvin]

remember

[ueaj @_ueaj]

@hecubian_devil many are saying

[Cassie Pritchard @hecubian_devil]

DSA should be running some honeypots tbh.

[ueaj @_ueaj]

@_NathanCalvin easily the tweet of the singularity

[ueaj @_ueaj]

idk I feel like the knowledge there are 100x more capable people out there, and that there's a good chance my work will never compare is.. fine? I still will enjoy doing it.

like if I don't get into a frontier lab, other than my work at pangram nothing, (including my philosophical ML research which I am extremely proud of) will matter in the slightest as smarter people than me figure it out on their own

I think if you work for the sake of the greater good and people around you, you have something to mourn. There won't be an alignment problem or a pangram in the future.

But fundamentally that motivation is sourced from my care of people, so I will simply move on and be fine.

like in a lot of ways I kinda am on a nature preserve right now, most people are to be honest, and it doesn't really change much

[ueaj @_ueaj]

I think people that fear loss of meaning from automation are less than animals. Human field oxen.

Do you not have any friends? Family? Have you not once felt the burden of being too busy for someone that needed help? No hobbies or dreams? Is the only thing that gives you joy in life a sense of superiority over your peers?

striverism delenda est

[ueaj @_ueaj]

I'm not sure why someone would be sad about their craft being automated if they enjoyed the work for the sake of it, you could still keep doing it.

I think it's ok to lament to some degree that your work will no longer contribute to others, but in that case atleast your motivation remains your care for others and you will be ok.

You have heart and a soul if you are sad for that reason, and you have nothing to fear

[ueaj @_ueaj]

@liminallogs I do not think it's the default outcome, no.

What I am angry about is people that think we shouldn't even fight for a good post-scarcity outcome, and instead create artificial scarcity to compete with one another

[ueaj @_ueaj]

1. This is more an argument against people that, IF it were possible to prioritize it, would still choose not to. I don't think it's the most likely outcome, most likely is some insane dystopia I think.

2. I mean not everyone can, but there will be many things to do for each other I think

3. Again, this is assuming we actually enforce this. It would be paternalistic, most of the hyperindividualistic futures end in transhumanism and then nihilism.

The question is not what can we automate, but what shouldn't we automate? assuming we have control over that, then I think we should still automate labor

[ueaj @_ueaj]

@metastatic77 I don't think this is that outlandish? this is sociopathy/psycopathy, a mental illness that harms people and society immensely, I think most people would say sociopaths need mental help?

[ueaj @_ueaj]

@UnrealRealist19 @GregoryConti19 also he explicitly says in the essay the telos of humanity is to work and compete, no mention of family, community or obligation

[ueaj @_ueaj]

I don't think it's the expected route of the technology, I think most of the likely outcomes are dystopian, but I take immense issue with the idea that we should fight for what is in my opinion one of the more, if not most dystopian outcomes.

He also does not mention that I am specifically calling out people that view those things as more important than family and caring for others

[ueaj @_ueaj]

@sevensix43 https://t.co/YBQS1vHtrz

[ueaj @_ueaj]

@MInusGix it does do that but the second part makes it fairly unambigous imo

[ueaj @_ueaj]

I was a little reductive here but I think social necessity would continue in luxury communism, we'd just value other things like human effort and connection.

The question in this case, is if we could automate all labor and choose instead to put human connection as paramount, should we?

I think so, in that scenario social necessity would continue, gift giving for example is not strictly necessesary, but when I do it, I often build little arts and crafts projects for my friends, I put in substantial work and effort to show that I care about them. This would continue I think.

Mastery over difficulty would still happen, hobbies exist even if you never turn it into a useful product

https://t.co/3eIdL3qK10

[ueaj @_ueaj]

this is very specifically targeting people that believe the luxury automated communism future is bad. Work without status can be done for 2 reasons

1. the work in and of itself (which would not be threatened, and would just be a hobby)
2. work on behalf of the greater good, which I do mourn, I am exactly this person, but obviously luxury communism would be for the greater good, the motivation is fundamentally sourced from a drive to protect those that I care about

[ueaj @_ueaj]

this is very specifically targeting people that believe the luxury automated communism future is bad. Work without status can be done for 2 reasons

1. the work in and of itself (which would not be threatened, and would just be a hobby)
2. work on behalf of the greater good, which I do mourn, I am exactly this person, but obviously luxury communism would be for the greater good, the motivation is fundamentally sourced from a drive to protect those that I care about